Tesla Model S P100D Sets New 1/4-Mile Record – Video

Remove weight – set new record!

That’s the idea and outcome here with this Tesla Model S P100D.

New Record

Video comes to us courtesy of Tesla Racing Channel. The record, set by the gutted Model S P100D, is no surprise really as the folks at Tesla Racing Channel have been hard at work over recent months making this Model S quicker and quicker by way of massive weight reductions.

The new record time for a Model S in the 1/4-mile stands at 10.41 seconds at 125.12 mph. That’s just a tick or two quicker than the old record (also held by Tesla Racing Channel at 10.44 seconds).

The car now has a few more modifications…or boltoffs. That includes taking out all the door speaks, besides the drivers, taking off the front sway bar and even swapping the 12volt battery under the frunk for something much lighter. The Tesla takes on a Stock Hellcat from a 40mph roll and a Buick Grand Nation from a dig.

I think what’s lost in the whole discussion is the Model S wasn’t designed specifically for this. Which makes it that much more impressive. Folks in the ICE crowd who still crow about a Demon sometimes maybe BARELY beating a non-stripped P100D forget that the Tesla Roadster is waiting quietly around the corner at some point. Elon hasn’t focused on a true performance car (yet), and when that happens it will be interesting to hear what the ICE crowd has to say.. especially when the Roadster runs 2.1 to 60 mph and high 9’s in the quarter.

Oh, and by the way, beats the ICE supercars through the twisty bits, too.

I’d like to see McLaren or even Porsche’s take on an all electric sports car. Their existing cars are not exactly designed to be electric. When that happens it will be interesting to see what the Tesla crowd has to say.

What about the NIO EP9? That already exists and most Tesla owners I have seen in the comment sections think it’s cool.

It’s not from a traditional automaker but who cares? Are you implying that you would expect that the “Tesla crowd” would be negative toward any traditional automaker’s stab at making a sporty EV? If so I think you’ll find that they will great any real effort at making good EVs with open arms.

It’s the compliance or PR stunt EV efforts that will consistently and rightfully be panned by the “Tesla crowd”.

What’s your point here? There are also custom drag cars that easily get low 9s in the 1/4 mile that would also beat a Tesla but won’t be very useful driving around town.

The point of all of these videos it to show the potential and power that EVs have by having a heavy 4 door family production sedan that isn’t modified (other than gutting) kick a lot of very powerful and expensive production ICVs’ asses in the quarter mile. Some are even modified for drag racing. Some are production sports cars designed for the sole purpose to be quick. That’s the point.

Yupe, that’s getting borderline now Four Electrics – not that specific post, but your ‘body of work’ over 725 comments now as taken as a whole. Getting to be some pretty random/frequent knocks now, and given your history…well, just suggesting maybe you dial it back a touch.

We aren’t feeling like policing another thread-jack, and we are actively trying to divert some time resources away from moderating (which are way too high right now) and back into producing more content.

ps) don’t please don’t “poke the bear” with a retort in this thread, strongly suggest you just wait until the next thread to participate again

Most superchargers lose power at altitude because the supercharger spins just as fast at altitude as at sea level. You have to change pulley size to spin the supercharger faster to make up for the altitude.

Turbos definitely make up quite a bit of the altitude loss, if the computer can spin the turbos up to higher RPM. But even then you lose some power for a number of factors:

1) The turbo’s shape/vanes/size are typically optimized for sea level (unless they are variable or dual chambered). They aren’t optimized to move less dense air.

2) There is a maximum you can spin up turbo RPM’s. So if you have a smaller turbo it can max out before you can make up for the less dense air.

3) Premium gas sold at high altitude is 91 Octane, because non-turbocharged cars don’t need the higher octane because of the less dense air. But because the turbo makes up most of the difference in altitude, you really need the full octane that you would get in premium gas at sea level. So unless you are running race gas (or octane additive) then the engine will pull timing to keep from pinging. This timing will also cost you a little bit compared with sea level.

4) It takes more back-pressure/horsepower to spin a turbo faster to make up for altitude loss. Not a huge contributor, but it all adds up.

5) Spinning the turbo’s harder increases the temperature of the air being pushed into the engine. Some cars might need better intercoolers to handle the higher charge air temps if the stock intercooler is undersized from the factory.

But yes, turbos are the best answer to altitude, giving you back most of your power, but not quite all of it.

Meanwhile, electric cars should be slightly faster at higher speeds due to less air resistance due to less dense air.

Turbos bleed excess air out through wastegate on full throttle. There’s no need to spin it faster unless the altitude is so high that wastegate isn’t opened on full throttle. I don’t think that’ll ever happen in any land on earth.

Not sure if all superchargers have wastegates, but for those that do, they’d also be the same as turbo; they already pump more air than the engine can use, so having it on higher altitude wouldn’t make any difference.